Effects of oil-based adjuvants on the immune response of pigs after dermal administration of antigen and evaluation of the immunization level after a subsequent Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae challenge in pigs
Language English Country Netherlands Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article
PubMed
36481482
DOI
10.1016/j.vetmic.2022.109607
PII: S0378-1135(22)00276-0
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Intradermal, Pig, Protection, Vaccine,
- MeSH
- Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae * MeSH
- Adjuvants, Immunologic MeSH
- Administration, Cutaneous MeSH
- Bacterial Vaccines MeSH
- Emulsions MeSH
- Immunity MeSH
- Immunization veterinary methods MeSH
- Immunoglobulin G MeSH
- Actinobacillus Infections * prevention & control veterinary MeSH
- Swine Diseases * prevention & control MeSH
- Swine MeSH
- Antibodies, Bacterial MeSH
- Vaccination methods veterinary MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Adjuvants, Immunologic MeSH
- Bacterial Vaccines MeSH
- Emulsions MeSH
- Immunoglobulin G MeSH
- Antibodies, Bacterial MeSH
Route of vaccine delivery can greatly impact the immunogenicity, efficacy and safety of the vaccine. Four groups of piglets were immunised transdermally (t.d.), intradermally (i.d.) or intramuscularly (i.m.) with the same doses of antigen in combination with a water-in-oil-in-water emulsion adjuvant Montanide™ ISA 201 VG or with a microemulsion adjuvant Montanide™ IMS 1313 VG N ST (Seppic, France). The last group was left without vaccination as a control group. All animals were subsequently exposed to the infection induced by Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (App). The immune response was evaluated with respect to the intensity of systemic and mucosal antibody formation, their isotype characterisation and rate of cell-mediated immunity. These findings were compared with the intensity of adverse local reactions and level of protection in experimental challenge. Monitoring of the local reaction at the injection site after each administration showed that microemulsion adjuvant IMS 1313 was less reactogenic than the water-in-oil-in-water emulsion ISA 201. In terms of efficacy, both dermal administrations were less immunogenic than the i.m route. The i.m. injection induced higher anti-App9 IgG and IgM titres. Nevertheless, IgG1 and IgG2 isotypes analysis revealed a close immunological profile between i.m. and i.d. routes. The concentration of IFN-γ from peripheral blood after in vitro restimulation with the specific antigen was only increased in the i.m. group at the day of challenge (D35) and two weeks after (D49). Interestingly, the smallest gross pulmonary lesions were observed in the i.d. vaccinated group (3.4%) compared to the control group (39.4%) and to groups with other routes of administration. Taken together, these results suggest that i.d. administration of vaccines is a promising approach. Even the i.d. vaccine was more reactogenic and slightly less immunogenic than the i.m. vaccine, its protection effectiveness seemed to be superior.
Seppic SA Paris La Défense 50 Boulevard National CS 90020 92257 La Garenne Colombes Cedex France
Veterinary Research Institute Hudcova 296 70 62100 Brno Czech Republic
References provided by Crossref.org
